linux-kernel - Re: WARNING in apparmor_secid_to

lists.openwall.net		lists / announce owl-users owl-dev john-users john-dev passwdqc-users yescrypt popa3d-users / oss-security kernel-hardening musl sabotage tlsify passwords / crypt-dev xvendor / Bugtraq Full-Disclosure linux-kernel linux-netdev linux-ext4 linux-hardening linux-cve-announce PHC
Open Source and information security mailing list archives

Hash Suite for Android: free password hash cracker in your pocket

[<prev] [next>] [<thread-prev] [thread-next>] [day] [month] [year] [list]

Message-ID: <CACT4Y+Z036bZfN1-_VaQ5EorwFt_tpPm=RTnrYN5qKV_ebgoFw@mail.gmail.com>
Date:   Fri, 1 Feb 2019 11:50:50 +0100
From:   Dmitry Vyukov <dvyukov@...gle.com>
To:     Tetsuo Handa <penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp>
Cc:     Casey Schaufler <casey@...aufler-ca.com>,
        Paul Moore <paul@...l-moore.com>,
        Stephen Smalley <sds@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        syzbot <syzbot+21016130b0580a9de3b5@...kaller.appspotmail.com>,
        tyhicks@...onical.com, John Johansen <john.johansen@...onical.com>,
        James Morris <jmorris@...ei.org>,
        LKML <linux-kernel@...r.kernel.org>,
        linux-security-module@...r.kernel.org,
        Serge Hallyn <serge@...lyn.com>,
        syzkaller-bugs <syzkaller-bugs@...glegroups.com>,
        Jeffrey Vander Stoep <jeffv@...gle.com>,
        SELinux <selinux@...ho.nsa.gov>,
        Russell Coker <russell@...er.com.au>,
        Laurent Bigonville <bigon@...ian.org>,
        syzkaller <syzkaller@...glegroups.com>
Subject: Re: WARNING in apparmor_secid_to_secctx

On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 11:44 AM Tetsuo Handa
<penguin-kernel@...ove.sakura.ne.jp> wrote:
>
> On 2019/02/01 19:09, Dmitry Vyukov wrote:
> > Thanks for the explanations.
> >
> > Here is the change that I've come up with:
> > https://github.com/google/syzkaller/commit/aa53be276dc84aa8b3825b3416542447ff82b41a
>
> You are not going to apply this updated config to upstream kernels now, are you?
> Removing CONFIG_DEFAULT_SECURITY="apparmor" from configs used by upstream kernels
> will cause failing to enable AppArmor (unless security=apparmor is specified).


We do use  security=apparmor, see:
https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/dashboard/config/upstream-apparmor.cmdline
https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/dashboard/config/upstream-selinux.cmdline
https://github.com/google/syzkaller/blob/master/dashboard/config/upstream-smack.cmdline


> I guess you can apply this updated config to linux-next kernels given that
> you replace
>
>   CONFIG_LSM="yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,selinux,smack,tomoyo,apparmor"
>
> with
>
>   CONFIG_LSM="yama,loadpin,safesetid,integrity,apparmor,selinux,smack,tomoyo"
>
> so that AppArmor is enabled instead of SELinux.
>
> >
> > I've disabled CONFIG_SECURITY_TOMOYO_OMIT_USERSPACE_LOADER (it
> > actually looked like omitting a user-space loader that I don't have is
> > the right thing to do, but okay, it indeed does not with =y).
> >
> > For now I just enabled TOMOYO and SAFESETID.
> > I see the problem with making both linux-next and upstream work. If we
> > use a single config and lsm= cmdline argument, then on upstream all
> > kernels will use the same module (they won't understand lsm=). But if
> > we add security= then it will take precedence over lsm= on linux-next,
> > so we won't get stacked modules.
>
> Right.
>
> >
> > Let's go with (c) because I don't want an additional long-term maintenance cost.
>
> OK.
>
> > If I understand it correctly later we will need to replace:
> > security=selinux
> > security=smack
> > security=apparmor
> >
> > with:
> > lsm=yama,safesetid,integrity,selinux,tomoyo
> > lsm=yama,safesetid,integrity,smack,tomoyo
> > lsm=yama,safesetid,integrity,tomoyo,apparmor
>
> Yes. Thank you.